Somalia: Creating Space for Fresh Approaches to Peacebuilding

addressing terrorism: a theory of change approach
This introduces and injects a dose of cognitive dissonance requiring exploration
within diverse explanations of a complex reality. In turn the very existence
of alternative conversations demands more of leadership than facile and monolithic
explanations about why violence is needed and justified. On the other hand,
isolation, though aimed at narrowing the space for operations of targeted leaders,
in fact decreases outside contact and the introduction of alternative views when
the outcome of this strategy creates a whole population effect. The net result may
well strengthen the capacity of control of extremist leadership within their constituencies
rather than reducing their sphere of influence. 10
A careful exploration of theory of change requires empirical evidence. In
particular, isolation as a change strategy needs to be more explicit as to how it
interacts with the contested and strategic grey area, and will need to establish why
and how diminished contact and conversation within the wider affected population
contributes to the desired change it purports to accomplish.
Empirically, if indicators were established to measure impact, several would
shed light on the theory. For example, what if capacity to recruit people into terroristic
acts were an indicator of desired change? In essence, here we would seek to
measure whether a particular strategy of change increased or decreased the ability
of leadership to recruit active followers and bring them into acts of violence. If
the isolation strategy works according to its theory, leaders of these groups should
have less capacity to recruit, and eventually their numbers will desiccate.
Little empirical evidence seems to exist that this holds true. In fact, in a
number of locations the impact of isolation coupled with outside violence has led
to increased capacity for recruitment. What accounts for the appeal and legitimacy
these movements seem to enjoy? How does the impact of having little contact,
consultation and engagement with their views contribute to the ability of leaders
to sustain a narrative that holds sway among a significant constituency?
One could argue that a more fine-tuned theory would be important in reference
to specific ways in which isolation functions with an eye toward change. For
example, Benjamin and Simon suggest this be approached with two concentric
circles. 11 A small inner circle represents key leaders and those directly involved in
terrorism. A much larger outer circle describes something close to the grey area,
the contested population from which recruits may be found or from which may
emanate pressure to shift the strategy away from violence.
Their argument suggests that this requires a strategy with capacity to appropriately
target isolation of the few, while robustly engaging the wider population.
As Cortright and Lopez argue, the goal must “isolate hard core elements and
separate them from their potential base. This requires a political approach that
addresses deeply felt grievances, promotes democratic governance, and supports
sustainable economic development.” 12 Such approaches narrow the focus of isolation
toward core leaders and encourage robust interaction within the wider civil
society. The blanket approach that isolates whole populations in order to isolate
leaders does not, at least as currently defined, have a clear theory of change, and
may have produced totally unintentional and undesired consequences.
10 See Cortright, et al and the
specific on the ground reports that
isolation creates a dynamic that
reinforces extremist leadership
and narrows the ability to provide
alternative narratives.
11 Benjamin and Simon, 2005.
12 Cortright and Lopez, 2007.
15